SUSHILABAI NANASAHEB DEO CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4863/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 July 20265 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee claimed to have manually filed a detailed reply with supporting documents before the due date, which was not considered by the CIT(E). Therefore, the matter was restored for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for renewal of registration under Section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application for non-compliance with a notice, stating the assessee failed to furnish requisite details.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the renewal application without considering the assessee's claim of manual submission of documents, violating principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE

For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT DR
Pronounced: 27.07.2026

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई पीठ�, मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BENCH: C BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA 4863/MUM/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: AY 2027-28 SUSHILABAI NANASAHEB DEO COMMISSIONER OF CHARITABLE TRUST INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI 703, ROOPRANG CHSL, LAYOUT 6, SURVEY NO 161, 601, 6TH FLOOR, SEVEN BUNGLOW, ANDHERI CUMBALLA HILL MTNL (WEST), MUMBAI, MUMBAI- TELEPHONE BUILDING, Vs. 400053, MAHARASHTRA PEDDER ROAD, GOPALRAO DESHMUKH MARG, CUMBALLA HILL, MUMBAI MUMBAI-400026, MAHARASHTRA अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent

Permanent Account Number of AAKTS2203F Assessee:

अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: Ms. Neha, AR ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT DR

सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 10-Jul-2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 27.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is directed against the order dated 28/02/2026 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai ["Ld. CIT(E)"], rejecting the assessee's application filed in Form No.10AB seeking renewal of registration u/s 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act").

ITA 4863/MUM/2026 SUSHILABAI NANASAHEB DEO CHARITABLE TRUST 2. Brief facts are that the assessee filed an application in Form No.10AB on 27/09/2025 vide Application No. CIT (Exemptions), MUMBAI 2025-26-12AA-19362 seeking renewal of registration u/s 12AB of the Act. During the course of proceedings, the Ld. CIT(E) issued a notice dated 30/01/2026 calling upon the assessee to furnish the requisite details on or before 06/02/2026. The notice specifically stated that personal appearance was not mandatory and that compliance would be treated as sufficient if the requisite documents/details were uploaded on the portal or filed in the office of the Ld. CIT(E).

3.

According to the impugned order, the assessee failed to comply with the notice issued and, therefore, the application for renewal of registration was rejected on the ground of non- compliance.

Aggrieved by the impugned order, the assessee is in appeal before us.

4.

The Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application by recording that there was no compliance to the notice dated 30/01/2026. It was submitted that the assessee had duly filed a detailed reply manually in the office of the Ld. CIT(E) on 05/02/2026, well within the time stipulated in the notice, along with all the supporting documents and information called for. However, the said reply was neither taken on record nor considered while passing the impugned order. It was contended that the rejection of the application without considering the reply already filed amounts to violation of the principles of natural justice. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee satisfies all the

ITA 4863/MUM/2026 SUSHILABAI NANASAHEB DEO CHARITABLE TRUST conditions prescribed u/s 12AB of the Act and prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

4.1. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(E). However, it was fairly submitted that if the Bench is inclined to restore the matter, suitable directions may be issued to the assessee to cooperate in the fresh proceedings.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is observed that the impugned order has been passed on the premise that the assessee failed to comply with the notice dated 30/01/2026. The specific contention of the assessee before us is that a detailed reply along with all the supporting documents was manually filed before the office of the Ld. CIT(E) on 05/02/2026, i.e., before the due date prescribed in the notice. If the said contention is correct, the reply furnished by the assessee ought to have been considered before arriving at any adverse conclusion.

6.

We find that the impugned order does not advert to the assessee's claim regarding manual filing of the reply on 05/02/2026. In such circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim, we are of the considered view that the interest of justice would be met by restoring the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration after verifying the assessee's contention regarding the reply stated to have been filed manually along with the supporting documents.

ITA 4863/MUM/2026 SUSHILABAI NANASAHEB DEO CHARITABLE TRUST 7. Accordingly, respectfully following the consistent view adopted by the Coordinate Benches in matters where applications have been rejected solely on account of alleged non-compliance without proper examination of the material claimed to have been furnished, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(E) shall verify the assessee's claim regarding the manual submission dated 05/02/2026, consider all the documents and evidences available on record, afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and thereafter pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.

8.

The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation during the fresh proceedings and furnish such further information and documents as may be called for by the Ld. CIT(E). Needless to state, if the assessee fails to cooperate, the Ld. CIT(E) shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27/06/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- BEENA PILLAI GIRISH AGRAWAL JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai Dated: 27/06/2026 SC, Sr. P.S.

ITA 4863/MUM/2026 SUSHILABAI NANASAHEB DEO CHARITABLE TRUST Copy to: SUSHILABAI NANASAHEB DEO CHARITABLE TRUST, 703, ROOPRANG CHSL, LAYOUT 6, 1 SURVEY NO 161, SEVEN BUNGLOW, ANDHERI (WEST), MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400053, MAHARASHTRA COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI, 601, 6TH FLOOR, CUMBALLA HILL MTNL TELEPHONE BUILDING, 2 PEDDER ROAD, GOPALRAO DESHMUKH MARG, CUMBALLA HILL, MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400026, MAHARASHTRA 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →